The misconception that a player has to play the ball with their foot

[OldPanther]

Responsibilities of the player in possession
The tackled player shall:
a. ‘without delay regain his feet where he is tackled,
b. lift the ball clear of the ground,
c. face his opponent’s goal line
d. place the ball on the ground,
and make a genuine attempt to play the ball with the foot and maintain his balance. Section 11 (10) (b)

They only have to make an attempt rather than strictly touch their foot. Though just stepping over seems to count these days.

Edit: I'm an idiot. Sorry all. Apparently the rule changed from 2016 - 2017.

Mistake on my part. The ball has to be "heeled" back.

Thanks to the people who found that.

 

[big hit!]

but if a player (cough, fifita, cough) consistently rolls the ball between their legs without playing it by foot, then is there a genuine attempt to play the ball by foot?

 

[adamkungl]

B is consistently ignored, moreso this season than ever.
Players are often using the ball as a crutch to stand up, attempting to roll it, then throwing their hands up when it gets fumbled due to a defender trying to clear the ruck.

Defender gets penalised for interfering with the ball when the ball never should have been there in the first place.

The ruck is devolving into a game of chicken between attacker and defender, who can out-milk the other.
I'm convinced some attackers deliberately drop the ball when there is a hand anywhere near it.

 

[Different kind of Rabbit]

That has always been the rule however the definition of what constitutes an attempt seems to have changed markedly in recent years.

Once upon a time you had to at least wave your foot over the ball. Now it seems that as long as the ball travels between the legs in a backwards motion, that is ok.

This is why you see the likes of Andrew Fifita and others basically just crawl over the ball.

 

[adamkungl]

If anything a,b and c in the rule are more important than the touch in d. Standing up and removing the ball from the ground before playing it have gone out the window

 

[Incorrect]

Has that rule been updated? Because I remember a game at Penrith one night when referee Steve Clark decided, out of the blue seemingly, to start penalising players if their foot didn't make contact in the play the ball... He must have dished out about 15 penalties in the first half alone that night.... It was weird, I don't think any other ref's were as harsh on it the same weekend and there was no directive from the ref's bosses to crack down on it from memory...

 

[OldPanther]

B is consistently ignored, moreso this season than ever.
Players are often using the ball as a crutch to stand up, attempting to roll it, then throwing their hands up when it gets fumbled due to a defender trying to clear the ruck.

Defender gets penalised for interfering with the ball when the ball never should have been there in the first place.

The ruck is devolving into a game of chicken between attacker and defender, who can out-milk the other.
I'm convinced some attackers deliberately drop the ball when there is a hand anywhere near it.

I want to slap Waqa Blake so bad for this. Every damn play the ball!

 

[Card Shark]

Has that rule been updated

I think it was. They added the bit about "attempt" a few years ago.

 

[Bring it home Knights]

Has that rule been updated? Because I remember a game at Penrith one night when referee Steve Clark decided, out of the blue seemingly, to start penalising players if their foot didn't make contact in the play the ball... He must have dished out about 15 penalties in the first half alone that night.... It was weird, I don't think any other ref's were as harsh on it the same weekend and there was no directive from the ref's bosses to crack down on it from memory...

From memory, the clubs were told that there would be a crack down in the play the ball in the week leading up to the game. I'm pretty sure that there was still plenty of penalties but not as many, quite possibly as clubs wised up after the Clark game.

 

[Shorty]

Once again it's inconsistency.
Some players get done for falling as they're playing the ball and the next another receives a penalty.

 

[tripster]

Has that rule been updated? Because I remember a game at Penrith one night when referee Steve Clark decided, out of the blue seemingly, to start penalising players if their foot didn't make contact in the play the ball... He must have dished out about 15 penalties in the first half alone that night.... It was weird, I don't think any other ref's were as harsh on it the same weekend and there was no directive from the ref's bosses to crack down on it from memory...

I was at that game and remember it too. It was against the Eels on a Friday night. Steve Clark cracked down on it hard and there were just constant penalties the whole night. The players didn't have a clue what was going on. It might have even been more than 15 penalties. It was also a damn cold night. I think Penrith won in the end, thanks to a few Ryan Girdler penalty goals.

 

[Chimp]

Fifita always gets pointed out as a culprit in this area (rightly), but JWH and the pillow Woodsy are equally as bad - they just don't milk for penalties as much.

 

[Dragon Slayer]

It's probably just me but discussion about this issue bores the tits off me.

As long as the ball rolls to the hooker who cares whether it was a leg or hand that got it there.

People call sport talk back radio like it's crucial to the game of Rugby League.

If you're calling a radio program to talk about that you have serious issues.

 

[LineBall]

I'm sure the rule used to say the ball had to be placed or dropped to the ground and played back with the foot. The current rule is a pissweak change because the officials weren't penalising the incorrect play the balls - so they changed the rule to match what the refs were letting the players get away with. Now we have the vague term "attempt" in the rule. How does one define an "attempt"? What constitutes a "good enough " attempt? Why not change some other rules? We could have attempt to get onside, attempt to ground the ball etc.

 

[blaza88z]

I know the rules but I cannot stand it when they put the ball on the ground and use the ball as a means to get up off the ground

 

[Munky]

Shane Tronc was the worst I've seen.

He used to pretty much snap the ball to the dummy half.

 

[OldPanther]

I know the rules but I cannot stand it when they put the ball on the ground and use the ball as a means to get up off the ground

They are suppose to penalise it.

 

[snickers007]

Responsibilities of the player in possession
The tackled player shall:
a. ‘without delay regain his feet where he is tackled,
b. lift the ball clear of the ground,
c. face his opponent’s goal line
d. place the ball on the ground,
and make a genuine attempt to play the ball with the foot and maintain his balance. Section 11 (10) (b)

They only have to make an attempt rather than strictly touch their foot. Though just stepping over seems to count these days.

Not sure what rules you're looking at, but the 2017 rule book, Section 11. Rule 10e states:

When the ball touches the ground it must be heeled (i.e. backwards) by the tackled player. The ball must not be kicked or heeled by the player marking him. The ball is in play when it has been played backward.


There is also nothing in the NRL Interpretations section regarding this.

https://www.nrl.com/portals/nrl/RadEditor/Documents/2017/arl-rules-book-2017-copy3-spc-1171219.pdf


So where are you looking?

 

[OldPanther]

Not sure what rules you're looking at, but the 2017 rule book, Section 11. Rule 10e states:

When the ball touches the ground it must be heeled (i.e. backwards) by the tackled player. The ball must not be kicked or heeled by the player marking him. The ball is in play when it has been played backward.


There is also nothing in the NRL Interpretations section regarding this.

https://www.nrl.com/portals/nrl/RadEditor/Documents/2017/arl-rules-book-2017-copy3-spc-1171219.pdf


So where are you looking?

So just found the ARL rule book 2017. Didn't realise it'd be ARL instead of NRL. Regardless they aren't following either.

 

[adamkungl]

It's probably just me but discussion about this issue bores the tits off me.

As long as the ball rolls to the hooker who cares whether it was a leg or hand that got it there.

People call sport talk back radio like it's crucial to the game of Rugby League.

If you're calling a radio program to talk about that you have serious issues.

The argument goes that if the attacker can roll the ball through without touching his foot, without even standing up, it speeds up the ruck - leading to the defenders to look for equally grey area ways to slow it down, leading to the wrestling and cheap tactics and milking we have now.

The question is should ruck-speed, how fast someone can roll the ball backwards, be a deciding factor of games? Of the reasons we all find Rugby League entertaining I doubt a nice play-the-ball ranks in the top 100. Is there some way to nullify the effect that ruck speed has?